Bradley vs Abrams
 

Hi

What is the point in taking M3A2 Bradley-AT at 467p instead of M1A2 Abrams at 483p. They cost almost the same and MBT comes with a significant armour. Am I missing something important?

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Try comparing the Abrams' top armour against the TOW-2B HEAT penetration, and check the missile class of the TOW-2B (hint: TA-ATGM).

in a defensive battle, or used overwatch to your MBT in the attack, they should prove rather deadly against enemy MBT, provided you can keep at reasonable stand-off range. (Though for a few points less, I would take the APC version with the same missile and gain 6 dismounts over a few more stored ATGM).

Cheers
Andy

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Also it is getting very frustrating fitting an extra 6 soldiers inside the Abrams.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Certainly going for the infantry ones has its merits over the Abrams depends what you want.

Vs Armour good at range though less shots than a tank & firing restrictions.

Everything else it probably does better.
Carrys 6 men & the cannon makes light work of enemy troops helos etc

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

I would take the Abrams if heavy tank action is expected, but if that's not the case, the bradley is more versatile, it will destroy all kinds of armor that show up, destroy infantry, and pack some men to mop up.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

OK, I have found the APC version under Infantry/Inf Mech Plt. It comes with pricy Javelin teams, but I can remove halt of that platoon after a purchase to spend only 1221 points. Generally in the places where I can buy an APC only Stryker variants are avalible.

Is "TA-ATGM weapon class" important? Does it behave different than any other weapon with the same ACC, HEAT penetration and warhead?

I was looking for an inexpensive universal armoured support for USA company in 2010. I can see that M1128 MGS+ is used for that task.

I have playe WW2 era much more than MBT and I can see that I should stop considering armour in that era cathegories - tank, armoured car, simple APC. That made me confused why an APC (I have to admit - a sophisticated one) cost the same as heavy tank.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

TA-ATGM can hit a vehicle from the top where it has minimum armor. Most of the time that means the destruction of the target no matter how much armor it has anywhere else.

The problem with ATGMs is that they can be stopped/fooled if the target has CWIS or VIRSS.

The problem with Bradley's and other similar units is that they are easier to destroy. Even with normal artillery you have higher chance of destroying one than a MBT.
MBTs are mocked often, but when they break your lines after some proper artillery barrage to suppress the ATGMs, then the only one laughing is the one with the MBTs.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

I am aware how systems like Javelin work in live, but I wasn't aware that it is implemented in the game. I have always thought that the notes besides the ammo description are to help me decipher weapon type, not that there are also used inside the game.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Game Options -> help Tab -> Mobhack Help Button.

Mobhack Help -> Weapons Tab Section -> Weapons Class box lists the weapons types.

The Mobhack help is usually the place to look for technical details.

Cheers
Andy

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Mech Pl [-AT] ( formation 783 )

and

Mech Co [-AT] ( formations 785, 786, 787 )


do not have the Javelin teams .


Don

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Unfortunately (at least from my point of view) the majority of the cost of vehicles in WinSPMBT comes from their vision and weapons systems. Armor is a rather small part of their cost.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

A TI, good FC/RF and decent offensive weapons are inherently more valuable than armor most of the time. Armor can be incredibly useful but this is highly dependent on the circumstances.
Back in its days the extra armor of a early T-72 compared to a T-55 was a nice advantage against 105mm guns. Against later high end 120mm they were both equally toast, their armor difference becoming meaningless. TI, modernized FC and decent rounds would give each of them the ability to face modern tanks at least in the ambush mode; this is especially true in a game where laying smoke is rather easy.
Likewise the tactical value of the Tiger I armor was very different in early 1943 compared to early 1945.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

TI and FC are fantastic to have, I don't disagree. Armor is still very important as long as it is higher than certain value. Get a latest version Merkava or even Abrams and try to kill it from a distance without top attack atgm. Good luck.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

Oh I don't disagree at all that vision/weapon systems are vital, that said there is a certain advantage to being able to drive up to a dug in infantry position without needing to worry much about RPGs or LAAWs.

Re: Bradley vs Abrams
 

What I meant to say is that TI/LRF/FC are useful by default, in most circumstances.
Armor, beyond what it takes to fend off MGs and arty fragments, is a case by case. If you have 40 worth of HEAT armor and you are being shot at with basic RPG then that 40 is worth its weight in gold. If you are facing RPGs with penetration of 60 then 40 is not much of an improvement over 4.
So it seems logical that a cost calculator that has to work for the whole game would value the former factors more than armor.